Quote:
Originally Posted by astralis
...like it or not, the US army will soon be forced to draw down simply from lack of replacements, and the lack of desire to continue extending deployments. most likely, we're going to be looking at anywhere from 50K-75K troops deployed in iraq throughout the next presidency: the scenario which pentagon planners were looking at as an alternative to the surge. so we'll try to wring as much tactical advantage as we can out of this, and hopefully a well-conducted withdrawal will allow us to avoid the mistake of over-coddling.
it's a damn hard rope-walk here.
|
A lot of hidden issues are lurking in that state of affairs, but I do hope that when we leave, we leave because we got the job done, not because the water ran out of the canteen.
The whole body of pre-Iraq analysis concerning US resolve in responding to threats is going to be tossed out the window if we walk out of Iraq as having accomplished our main goals there. You will be surprised at the change, and perhaps even proud of it. It is a ways off yet, but to our adversaries and friends, everyday we stay in Iraq and every time we fall down on some tactic and get back up and succeed, gradually convinces the countries in the region and the world that the US will respond to threats to its secuirty and vital interests. It's a new US, or if you will, a reborn US. The dems will be chastized, but prepared to reconcile and even perhaps agree. The only thing I hope never happens is that we unnecessarily put our guys in harms way to prove the dems wrong.